Battle: Los Angeles

Director: Jonathan Liebesman
Writer: Christopher Bertolini
Actors: Aaron Eckhart (Dark Knight, No Reservations, etc.), Aaron Eckhart, and more Aaron Eckhart.
[There were other actors but Aaron Eckhart (Ssgt. Michael Nantz) dominated the screen]

Rated PG-13 {definitely not a good idea for small children or squeamish people}

The prerelease IMDB plot summary of this movie read...
"A Marine platoon faces off against an alien invasion in Los Angeles."
and that is exactly what you will see if you watch this movie, nothing more and nothing less.

I imagine that is why critics despised this movie so much. There was nothing "new" about it. Battle: Los Angeles was just a movie about soldiers across the globe duking it out with extraterrestrial invaders on their respective coasts (this movie focuses on the Marines in Los Angeles). With that said, it was an excellent watch. It may have been the same old thing but it did it with a style and class that most Sci-Fi/Action movies lack.

WHAT I LIKED

Besides the awesome war-time action, Battle: Los Angeles showed that tons of obscene language is not necessary for a good combat-laden film. Take that every other war movie!

WHAT I DID NOT LIKE

My only complaint, which is a minor one, is that some of the camera shots made you think something was sneaking up on the soldiers when really they just wanted to get closer. This somewhat distracted from the movies action because then you were wondering why they filmed it that way.

FINAL THOUGHTS

While the movie is not much deeper than the trailers, it did not hurt my viewing to have seen any of them. This movie deserves a B- for being better than average but nothing new.

WHEN SHOULD YOU SEE IT?

It would not kill you to wait for it to release but the theater experience was worth my $8.


SCORE

Personal Rating: 8 of 10 (B-)

Plot: 6 of 10 (nothing new)

How does this TS review compare to major reviews?
IMDB 5.9/10
Rotten Tomatoes C-35%/A-49%

CONTENT

Violence: 8 of 10 (there is a lot of death: they wade through corpses, forces take turns savagely murdering each other, soldiers are gravely wounded, and they dig through a live alien's innards to find a weak spot)

Language/Profanity: 6 of 10 (surprisingly low for a war movie)

Sexuality/Sensuality: 4 of 10 (virginity and losing it is discussed, one of the Marines give his wife's pregnant belly a kiss)

Spiritual Aspects: 2 of 10 (I'm sure someone says Oh God and I just didn't notice)

Drugs/Alcohol: 3 of 10 (there's a party early in the movie where a guy pukes up a beer, everyone is drinking)

Rango

Director: Gore Verbinski
Writers: John Logan, Gore Verbinski, & James Ward Byrkit
Actors: Johnny Depp, Isla Fisher, Bill Nighy, & Timothy Olyphant
[Like most big budget animated movies, this movie is voice acted by quite a few big name actors]

Rated PG {despite its low rating, I would not recommend this movie for children}

This was a movie that I went into with very few expectations. Pretty much everyone I know that saw said it was dark but enjoyable. While I enjoyed some parts of the movie, I found the description of dark to be a major understatement.

WHAT I LIKED

The animation in this movie kept me watching it. I'm not so sure that this is a good thing though, especially for a story driven movie.

Call me a sucker for Hans Zimmer, but I loved the music in Rango.

The thing I liked best about this movie, however, was the character Rattlesnake Jake, a scary, poison-fanged gunslinger with a repeater (gun) for a tail and several bandoliers.

WHAT I DID NOT LIKE

I could write a lengthy commentary about the various things in Rango that I disliked but I have decided that they can be categorized into two broad groups. I really disliked how dark Rango was. This would not be as big of a deal if it had not been marketed to children, but it was. I would be happier showing this to kids than I would be with a dark comedy like A Boy And His Dog (1975) but not much happier.

The other complaint I have is this movie's under theme-ing, by that I mean constantly alluding to something other than what they are saying or showing. I enjoy this in movies when this is done tastefully, but this movie beat you with it like you were probably too dumb to notice they said Thespian, which rhythms with lesbian.

FINAL THOUGHTS

Despite being really well made, Rango left me feeling indifferent. I give it a D for being better than a failure but not on par.


WHEN SHOULD YOU SEE IT?

When someone loans you are copy. This isn't a movie to avoid but it is not one you should excitedly hunt down.


SCORE

Personal Rating: 6 of 10 (D)

Plot: 5 of 10 (a predictable story focused movie)

How does this TS review compare to major reviews?
IMDB 7.4/10
Rotten Tomatoes C-88%/A-69%


CONTENT

Violence: 4 of 10 (Incredibly violent for a PG movie: with animals getting run over by cars, threatened, eaten, shot, blown up, squeezed, crushed, and almost hanged)

Language/Profanity: 4 of 10 (Much more than I was expecting: with several substitutes for testicles, "son of a ...", "damn", and "hell" all being used)

Sexuality/Sensuality: 4 of 10 (Minor flirty throughout the movie, during the bar scene several call girls/prostitutes are seen, and fighting between two female characters ends with one calling the other a "floozy" with other replying "trollop")

Spiritual Aspects: 1 of 10 (There a legend/man who is referred to as the Spirit of the West)

Drugs/Alcohol: 4 of 10 (A surprising amount of smoking and drinking)